Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.2 RecAquaticHistParkConsltSvcs CITY CLERK File # D[2][]][5.[]]~ ~ .)..QS -- 10 AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 3,2006 SUBJECT: Request for Proposals for Financial Advisor and Public Opinion Research Firm Report Prepared By: Richard C. Ambrose, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1) 2) Request for Qualifications for Public Opinion Research Firm Request for Qualifications for Financial Advisor RECOMMENDATlON:~ Consider options regarding the Recreation! Aquatic Complex and Historic Park and provide direction to Staff. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Consulting Services costs will be determined once the City receives the proposals. There is currently no funding included in the FY2005-2006 budget for this purpose at this time. DESCRIPTION: At the November 18, 2005 Park and Recreation Facility Planning Workshop, the City Council received a presentation regarding the feasibility of developing a state of the art Recreation/Aquatic Complex in Emerald Glen Park and the expansion of Historic Park adjacent to the City's existing Heritage Center. The estimated cost of the Recreation and Aquatics Complex is approximately $39 million. The City has $17 million dedicated to this project from Public Facility Impact Fees resulting in a total shortfall of $22 million. The estimated cost of the Historic Park is approximately $25 million. The City has not identified a source of revenue for this project. Public Opinion Research In response to the information presented at the Workshop, the City Council directed City Staff to conduct a survey of voters to determine the level of community support for either an increase in the ad valorem property tax or the establishment of a parcel tax to fund these facilities. These revenues would be used to fund either a General Obligation Bond or Certificates of Participation. If there is sufficient community support, the City Council would consider placing a tax measure on the November 2006 General Election Ballot. In order to conduct a statistically valid survey of Dublin voters, it is necessary for the City to retain the services of a public opinion research firm. The research firm will be requested to conduct the following tasks as outlined in the RFQ: 1. Develop questionnaire in consultation with City Staff, with approval of the City Council. Questionnaire will be designed to gauge the opinion of Dublin voters with respect to a potential ballot measure to finance a Recreation/Aquatic Complex and/or Historic Park. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COPY TO: Page 1 of 4 ITEM NO. -.i . 2 F:\Agenda Slalemenls\O 1 032006FinanciaJAdvisor.doc tU 2. Select a random sample of Dublin registered voters. 3. Conduct a 10 minute quantitative research telephone survey of registered Dublin voters to ensure statistically valid results with a margin of error of +/- 5 percent. 4. Prepare coding, tabulation and analysis of survey results. 5. Prepare a detailed written report on the results including a statement of methods, findings, conclusions and recommendations. Financial Advisor In order to develop appropriate public opinion survey questions, it is necessary to develop tax revenue estimates that would satisfy the debt service or lease payments associated with a General Obligation Bond or Certificates of Participation The City will also need information that will assist the City in testing various tax amounts against the survey questions. The financial advisor will be requested to conduct the following tasks as described in the RFQ: 1. Bond Estimates- Consultant will be responsible for determining all costs associated with the issuance of a 30 year General Obligation Bond and/or Certificates of Participation issue including the annual debt service payment schedule necessary to fund the Recreation Facilities and possibly several alternative levels of funding. 2. Property Tax Override Estimates - Consultant will be responsible for preparing estimates for an increase to the 1% ad valorem property tax rate, based on the City's current assessed valuation, sufficient to cover the debt service payment schedule. Sample tax assessment increases should be prepared for the survey to demonstrate what the average property owner would pay. 3. Parcel (Excise) Tax Estimates - Consultant will be responsible for preparing parcel tax revenue estimates as an alternative means of financing the Recreation Facilities debt. This could include using the City's Public Facilities Impact Fee Study to determine the appropriate amount of tax paid by each parcel in the City based on County use codes. The Public Facilities Fee Study charges different fee amounts based on estimated use of public facilities (single family, multi-family, retail, office, industrial). Parcel tax amounts should be developed for each of these categories that would correspond to appropriate County use codes and that would generate sufficient revenues to cover the annual lease payments associated with a Certificate of Participation Issue which would fund the shortfall identified above and several alternatives. Potential Changes in Market Competition Subsequent to the City Council Funding Workshop on November 181h, Staff has learned of some fitness companies that are interested in entering the market in the Dublin area. The market analysis prepared by The Sports Management Group for the Emerald Glen Recreation and Aquatic Complex did not include these potential facilities. The analysis included the existing private and public recreation and aquatic facilities within a five-mile radius of Emerald Glen Park. The analysis also included the proposed 65,000 square-foot fitness facility planned for the Medical Complex at the corner of Tassajara and Dublin Boulevard.k 200'"* One of the potential projects that has surfaced is the development of a franchise fitness club in Downtown Dublin. This 28,000 square-foot facility would include fitness equipment such as cardio and weight machines, free weights, multiple group exercise studios, childcare and executive locker rooms. A national firm that is interested in entering the market in the Tri-Valley has also approached Staff. The company prefers a location in the Emerald Park area (Alameda County Surplus Property Authority). The company's prototype facility is a 110,000 square-foot recreation and aquatic facility that mirrors the amenities planned in Emerald Glen Park. It would include three times as much gymnasium space, three times as much fitness and weight equipment, multiple group exercise studios (compared to the single studio planned for Emerald Glen), an indoor fitness pool, indoor recreation pool with play structures, and an outdoor recreation pool with waterslides and a lazy river. The aquatic amenities appear to be slightly larger than those planned at Emerald Glen Park. The facility would include upscale locker rooms and more family changing rooms. It would also include a 3,700 square-foot childcare facility with a mini- gym. The company's primary target market includes families and therefore they have not included any competitive swimming pools in their prototype facility. This facility would be a unique amenity in the Tri- Valley. The representatives indicate there is significant potential in this market. If the company is unable to move forward with development in the Emerald Park Area, the facility will most likely be built elsewhere nearby. The development of this 110,000 square-foot facility, the 65,000 square-foot facility at the nearby medical complex, and the 28,000 square-foot facility in the downtown site would impact the amount of market penetration (percentage of people within a three to five-mile radius that would use the City facility) estimated for the 62,815 square-foot facility at Emerald Glen Park. In addition to facing more competition, the City would be competing with firms that have proven track records in meeting the needs of the fitness market. The company interested in the Emerald Park Area is an established, publicly traded company that has the resources available to replace equipment and furnishings on an annual basis in order to keep ahead of trends in the fitness industry. The increased competition would most likely reduce the amount of revenue generated by the City and increase the General Fund subsidy needed to operate the planned facility, which is currently estimated at over $600,000 annually. Given these developments, Staff recommends extending the Agreement with The Sports Management Group to analyze the impact ofthese potential facilities on the revenue potential for the preferred option for Emerald Glen Park. This could be done concurrently with the public opinion polling. Following the completion of the polling and the market analysis, the Council would have enough information to determine how to move forward. Public-Private Partnership The company interested in developing the Emerald Park Area currently has over 40 similar facilities nationwide. This would be the firm's first facility in California. Approximately seven of the firm's facilities have been developed as public-private partnerships with municipalities. In general the municipalities have contributed in some manner toward the development ofthe firm's prototype facility in order to obtain discounted membership fees for residents. In some instances municipalities have also augmented the facility by contributing funding toward the development of additional facilities, such as a competitive swimming pool. The company has indicated they might be interested in partnering with the City of Dublin in some manner. A public-private partnership may be a possible way to provide residents access to a state-of-the-art Recreation and Aquatic Complex without having to raise taxes. The City could use the development impact fees being collected for the Recreation and Aquatic Complex. The developer has indicated they have their own design/construction company internally and therefore could construct a larger facility for less money than a publicly built project. If the City partnered with the developer enough funding would ~Ob4- need to be provided to ensure access for all residents at reasonable rates. This may require an annual subsidy from the City, in addition to any funding the City would provide for construction of the public- private facility. If the Council is interested in analyzing the feasibility of a public-private partnership, Staff would recommend conducting that analysis concurrently with public polling and market analysis. The public opinion polling could also include questions to gauge the community's interest in a public-private partnership. It is anticipated Staff and the City Attorney could analyze the feasibility of a partnership without any additional consulting services. Following the polling and market analysis, Staff could also report back to the Council on the funding requirements and general terms of an agreement for a public- private partnership. Options This new information should be considered in determining how to proceed. Staff has identified the following options for the Council's consideration: 1. Release the RFQs for the public opinion research firm and the financial advisor to gauge the community's support for a tax measure to finance the Recreation/Aquatic Complex and Historic Park as discussed at the November 18lh City Council Workshop. It is important to note that the assumptions used in estimating the City's operational subsidy would need to be revisited, depending on where the privately owned facilities ultimately locate. Additionally, the survey results could prove to be unreliable, depending on the community's awareness of the potential development of similar, privately owned facilities. 2. Revise the RFQs to eliminate the Recreation/Aquatic Complex and only conduct financial analysis and voter opinion research for the proposed Historic Park and direct Staff to develop a more detailed report outlining the City's recreation and aquatic facility options in consideration of the privately owned facility, as discussed above. It is important for the Council to consider what impact removing the Recreation! Aquatic Complex from the survey might have on the community's support for a tax increase. 3. Direct Staff not to release the RFQs and to begin planning for a phased approach to the Historic Park and develop a more detailed report outlining the City's recreation and aquatic facility options in consideration ofthe privately owned facility. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council consider the options regarding the Recreation/Aquatic Complex and Historic Park and provide direction to Staff. L-{ Db i / of b REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS/PROPOSALS VOTER OPINION SURVEY FOR CITY OF DUBLIN Proposal must be submitted no later than January 20, 2006 The City of Dublin ("City") requests Qualifications/Proposals from qualified and experienced firms ("Consultant") with proven experience in conducting voter opinion research surveys for public agencies About the City of Dublin The City of Dublin has a population of approximately 40,000. The City is located at the intersection ofInterstate 580 and Interstate 680 in eastern Alameda County. Scone of Work The City is interested in developing a state of the art Recreation and Aquatics Complex at a cost of approximately $39 million. The City has $17 million dedicated to this project resulting in a total shortfall of $22 million. The City is also interested in expanding its existing Historic Park at a cost of approximately $25 million. The City has not identified a source of revenue for this project. The City Council has directed City Staff to conduct a survey of voters to determine the level of community support for either an increase in the ad valorem property tax or the establishment of a parcel tax to fund either or both facilities. These revenues would be used to fund either a General Obligation Bond or Certificates of Participation. If there is sufficient community support, the City Council will consider placing a tax measure on the November 2006 General Election Ballot. Concurrent with this RFQ/P process, the City is interviewing firms to conduct financial analysis associated with the project. Specifically, the Consultant will be responsible for completing the following tasks: 1. Develop questionnaire in consultation with City Staff, with approval of the City Council. Questionnaire will be designed to gauge the opinion of Dublin voters with respect to a potential ballot measure to finance a Recreation! Aquatic Complex and/or Historic Park. 2. Select a random sample of Dublin registered voters. 3. Conduct a 10 minute quantitative research telephone survey of registered Dublin voters to ensure statistically valid results with a margin of error of +/- 5 percent. - 1 - 1/3(06 f.:' ATTACHMENT 1 /,o+h 4. Prepare coding, tabulation and analysis of survey results. 5. Prepare a detailed written report on the results including a statement of methods, findings, conclusions and recommendations. Submittal Requirements All responders to this Request for QualificationfProposal must submit the following information: 1. Brief statement of qualifications (three pages maximum), including resumes. 2. Four (4) references (name of contact person, address, telephone number) from cities or public agencies with whom you have provided similar consulting assistance. With each reference, briefly describe the scope of services provided. 3. Name and qualifications of all proposed sub-contractors that might be needed for this work, including references and contact information. 4. Full list of services proposed under this RFQ/P, including any services not listed by the City in this RFQ/P, which the Consultant feels necessary to complete the objective of the City in producing the desired information. 5. Schedule of actions and timeline necessary to complete the City's objectives. 6. A full description of fees proposed for performing all the services in number 4 under Submittal Requirements. Consultant shall provide a breakdown of fees associated with the three areas of service listed in the RFQ/P. Other Information 1. The City reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals, and to reject as unresponsive, any proposal not containing all of the information requested in these specifications. 2. The City reserves the right to amend any aspect of the RFQ/P process and request additional information as necessary. 3. Only those firms invited to submit proposals will be considered and each firm will be evaluated upon: a. Firm qualifications. -2- ~ot ~ b. Experience with similar projects c. General accessibility and availability d. The responsiveness ofthe proposal to the City's specifications. e. Cost. 4. Contract award is anticipated no later than February 7, 2006. 5. Each individual submitting a proposal agrees to undertake the service if selected, and will not withdraw its proposal for a period ofthirty (30) days after the submittal date. 6. The City will not be responsible for any costs incurred by respondents in the preparation and submittal ofa response to this request. Staffwill make a recommendation to the City Council, who will award the agreement based upon the City's Standard Consultant Services Agreement (Exhibit A). 7. Three (3) copies of the proposal must be submitted Any questions concerning the information contained in this Request for QualificationlProposal may be directed to Jason Behrmann, Senior Administrative Analyst at (925) 833-6650. F:\ADMIN\Recreation Facility\Recrealion Facility public opinion RFQ.doc - 3 - 40+ ~ REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS/PROPOSALS TAX REVENUE ANALYSIS FOR FINANCING RECREATION FACILITIES FOR CITY OF DUBLIN Proposal must be submitted no later than January 20, 2006 The City of Dublin ("City") requests Qualifications/Proposals from qualified and experienced firms ("Consultant") with proven experience in developing bond and tax revenue calculations for the purpose of financing public facilities. About the City of Dublin The City of Dublin has a population of approximately 40,000. The City is located at the intersection ofInterstate 580 and Interstate 680 in eastern Alameda County. Scope of Work The City is interested in developing a state of the art Recreation and Aquatics Complex at a cost of approximately $39 million. The City has $17 million dedicated to this project resulting in a total shortfall of $22 million. The City is also interested in expanding its existing Historic Park at a cost of approximately $25 million. The City has not identified a source of revenue for this project. The City Council has directed City Staff to conduct a survey of voters to determine the level of community support for either an increase in the ad valorem property tax or the establishment of a parcel tax to fund either or both facilities. These revenues would be used to fund either a General Obligation Bond or Certificates of Participation. If there is sufficient community support, the City Council will consider placing a tax measure on the November 2006 General Election Ballot. Concurrent with this RFQ/P process, the City is interviewing firms to conduct the voter opinion research. In order to develop appropriate public opinion survey questions, it is necessary to develop tax revenue estimates that would satisfy the debt service or lease payments associated with a General Obligation Bond or Certificates of Participation. The City will also need information that will assist the City in testing various tax amounts against the survey questions. Specifically, the Consultant will be responsible for completing: I. Bond Estimates- Consultant will be responsible for determining all costs associated with the issuance of a 30 year General Obligation Bond and/or Certificates of - 1 - ATTACHMENT 2 5 of 6 Participation issue including the annual debt service payment schedule necessary to fund the Recreation Facilities and possibly several alternative levels of funding. 2. Property Tax Override Estimates - Consultant will be responsible for preparing estimates for an increase to the 1 % ad valorem property tax rate, based on the City's current assessed valuation, sufficient to cover the debt service payment schedule. Sample tax assessment increases should be prepared for the survey to demonstrate what the average property owner would pay. 3. Parcel (Excise) Tax Estimates - Consultant will be responsible for preparing parcel tax revenue estimates as an alternative means of financing the Recreation Facilities debt. This could include using the City's Public Facilities Impact Fee Study to determine the appropriate amount of tax paid by each parcel in the City based on County use codes. The Public Facilities Fee Study charges different fee amounts based on estimated use of public facilities (single family, multi-family, retail, office, industrial). Parcel tax amounts should be developed for each of these categories that would correspond to appropriate County use codes and that would generate sufficient revenues to cover the annual debt service payments associated with a Certificate of Participation which would fund the shortfall identified above and several alternatives. Submittal Requirements All responders to this Request for QualificationfProposal must submit the following information: 1. Brief statement of qualifications (three pages maximum), including resumes. 2. Four (4) references (name of contact person, address, telephone number) from cities or public agencies with whom you have provided similar consulting assistance. With each reference, briefly describe the scope of services provided. 3. Name and qualifications of all proposed sub-contractors that might be needed for this work, including references and contact information. 4. Full list of services proposed under this RFQ/P, including any services not listed by the City in this RFQ/P, which the Consultant feels necessary to complete the objective of the City in producing the desired information. 5. Schedule of actions and timeline necessary to complete the Agency's objectives. 6. A full description of fees proposed for performing all the services in number 4 under Submittal Requirements. Consultant shall provide a breakdown of fees associated with the three areas of service listed in the RFQ/P. - 2 - 60Pb Other Information 1. The City reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals, and to reject as unresponsive, any proposal not containing all of the information requested in these specifications. 2. The City reserves the right to amend any aspect of the RFQ/P process and request additional information as necessary. 3. Only those individuals invited to submit proposals will be considered and each individual will be evaluated upon: a. Individual qualifications. b. Experience with similar projects c. General accessibility and availability d. The responsiveness ofthe proposal to the City's specifications. e. Cost. 4. Contract award is anticipated no later than February 7, 2006. 5. Each individual submitting a proposal agrees to undertake the service if selected, and will not withdraw its proposal for a period of thirty (30) days after the submittal date. 6. The City will not be responsible for any costs incurred by respondents in the preparation and submittal of a response to this request. Staff will make a recommendation to the City Council, who will award the agreement based upon the City's Standard Consultant Services Agreement (Exhibit A). 7. Three (3) copies of the proposal must be submitted Any questions concerning the information contained in this Request for Qualification/Proposal may be directed to Jason Behrmann, Senior Administrative Analyst at (925) 833-6650. F:\ADMlNlRecrealion Facility\Recreation Facility Financing RFQ.doc - 3 -